Thoughts on "deep canon"

[blssdwlf]

>The images you posted on the "matching pods" are not of the TOS Shuttle so no comment necessary.

Uh...they are examples showing that each and every generation of shuttle has nacelles that match those of their particular mother ship. Warp nacelles, that is to say.

You only showed later shuttles matching the nacelles of their particular mothership. The discussion is specifically about the TOS shuttle which you already acknowledge do not match as the nacelles are missing key parts - the trough, p/s box, intercooler tubes, etc. The Romulan Bird of Prey with it's simple tube and nacelle dome is just as similar and are not warp nacelles.

>The TOS Shuttle on the flight deck doesn't show the troughs either...

No it does not. However, I don't think that rear view from G7 shows the back 2/3 of the nacelles, which after all are Vurra Long. I do concede that neither the stage prop nor miniature had troughs, but...but I've said this already, to no response. Given those the other 4 matching-warp-pod features of those pods, I say in re: the lack of troughs, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Which is to say, the TOS shuttle builders took care to include the 4 cheapest ID hints of the Gal's pods being warp pods...and omitted the more expensive aspect, which would likely go unseen.

Again, we'll have to agree to disagree since you want to imagine that there would've been troughs on the nacelles.

So WTF is Trek's "ion propulsion" / "ion power"? Even given the existence of an external-to-propulsor-proper black box which instills/creates/enables FTL, we're still left with the question of what's doing the thrusting (not that we know that in re: "warp drive" either, no generation of which seems to include/cite anything but an matter/antimatter reaction--a generator of energy, not thrust).

In "Spock's Brain" there is a comparison of "ion power" to a "nuclear pile a hundred miles across" that could "push this planet out of orbit". So in TOS, their Ion-related systems do not perform like any Real Life(TM) version of it.

So each image must be saved as an individual "picture" on my hard drive?

Yes. Save each picture on your hard drive and then upload each to Imgur. You can then use Imgur's image links here or anywhere else.

 

[trekkist]

>The Romulan Bird of Prey with it's simple tube and nacelle dome is just as similar and are not warp nacelles.

It's really not. Their back ends are hollow. TOS shuttle nacelles incorporated 4 features of warp nacelles...all of which were cheap and easy to build (unlike the troughs) and not prone to breakage (like the intercoolers).

>The discussion is specifically about the TOS shuttle

Yeah, not really. The discussion is more like "Do Trek shuttles have warp drive?" Between antimatter residue trails and roughly-matching nacelles (ST V Gal's aren't identical either; so what? They're built to represent that, as are all others), I think that's settled. You've your view, and you find mine dogmatic and hard-headed, as I find yours (no offense meant, let alone "fighting words").

>In "Spock's Brain" there is a comparison of "ion power" to a "nuclear pile a hundred miles across" that could "push this planet out of orbit". So in TOS, their Ion-related systems do not perform like any Real Life(TM) version of it.

I'll cube and/or square that: in TOS, "ion power" is shorthand for something that employs ions, but isn't related at all to ion propulsion as it is known and operated today--a system of minute thrust and very long-term application of acceleration, capable of providing high velocities after very long boost phases.

So let's drop "discussion" of "are they ion or warp nacelles?" and brainstorm about what phrase "ion power" is shorthand for, knowing full well that phrase's use in TOS was due to its sounding cool and futuristic.

(and also bearing in mind, as I think I raised earlier, that the phrase "matter/antimatter" refers to power generation, not the application of propulsion...which latter TOS went no farther at describing than to throw around the word "warp." As it did "ion power." Which is...what, do you think?

> >"nuclear pile a hundred miles across"

I don't have the nuclear physics training to back this up, but I suspect that would be impossible. "Nuclear pile" implies a fission reactor, which if 100 miles across would involved far more uranium than an entire planet's nuclear arsenals. Granted one could stop that mass going explosively critical via magic handwavium (force fields/deflectors/tractors, whatever), but why would you want to try? That Scott uses this comparison (not one to antimatter reactor(s)) suggests that really big fission reactors exist or have existed in TOS (thus giving him a basis for comparison).

How big a mass of uranium is without magic non-critical, if spread about in individually non-critical pieces? How many such individual masses (which hapless Manhattan Project guys fooled around with, at least one fatally--"tickling the dragon's tail," it was called) would a 100 mile diameter "pile" contain? What would its power output be?

Is there a physicist in the house?

(see? I can engage in pointless and endless discussion about topics other than nacelles. Which are warp "powered." Per the Kellogg shuttle's lack of 'em. So there)

(I really like it here. Everyone's so take-no-prisoners adult) (no sarcasm intended; gloves off, I mean)

 

[trekkist]

>Save each picture on your hard drive and then upload each to Imgur.

I just tried that, using the "Image" icon (the one with the sun above the mountain) to link to the Imgur picture. Nothing appeared here. WTF?

 

[blssdwlf]

>The Romulan Bird of Prey with it's simple tube and nacelle dome is just as similar and are not warp nacelles.

It's really not. Their back ends are hollow. TOS shuttle nacelles incorporated 4 features of warp nacelles...all of which were cheap and easy to build (unlike the troughs) and not prone to breakage (like the intercoolers).

Cheap budget doesn't advantage your argument that they should be the same though And don't forget that the Enterprise doesn't always have the sphere at the end of the nacelle. The Romulan Bird of Prey nacelles are alot closer to the TOS shuttles in simple features than the more complex Enterprise nacelles.

>The discussion is specifically about the TOS shuttle

Yeah, not really. The discussion is more like "Do Trek shuttles have warp drive?"

Moving goal posts makes it harder to have a discussion. It definitely started about TOS shuttles (see below quotes.)

>I thought TOS shuttles had FTL Ion engines? (As per "The Menagerie")

Hey, if it bears nacelles matching the style of its mothership's and leaves a trail of antimatter residue, it quacks like a duck. As to "Menagerie,"

So let's drop "discussion" of "are they ion or warp nacelles?" and brainstorm about what phrase "ion power" is shorthand for, knowing full well that phrase's use in TOS was due to its sounding cool and futuristic.

(and also bearing in mind, as I think I raised earlier, that the phrase "matter/antimatter" refers to power generation, not the application of propulsion...which latter TOS went no farther at describing than to throw around the word "warp." As it did "ion power." Which is...what, do you think?

My headcanon is that the TOS shuttle's ion engine is an older but safer technology compared to a modern matter-antimatter engine. The shuttle's fuel and engine systems make it relatively safe in crash landings and parked situations while carried on a ship or landed at a spaceport. It is probably a variant of an FTL Impulse engine. Like other Star Trek systems, it can be overloaded and made into a bomb but with much greater difficulty and lower yield.

>Save each picture on your hard drive and then upload each to Imgur.

I just tried that, using the "Image" icon (the one with the sun above the mountain) to link to the Imgur picture. Nothing appeared here. WTF?

Are you doing this?
1. Save image to your hard drive
2. Upload image to Imgur
3. Right-click on Imgur's image to copy image link
4. Paste image link into TrekBBS's image button's Image URL

 

[trekkist]

Maybe not step 3. I'll verify. Thanks!

>Moving goal posts makes it harder to have a discussion. It definitely started about TOS shuttles (see below quotes.)

trekkist said:
blssdwlf said:
>I thought TOS shuttles had FTL Ion engines? (As per "The Menagerie")
Hey, if it bears nacelles matching the style of its mothership's and leaves a trail of antimatter residue, it quacks like a duck. As to "Menagerie...

I don't think this qualifies as "moving goal posts." More like "broadening the argument."

There's also an "original intent" element. Do you really think the TOS shuttle's designers & builders did not mean its nacelles, so similar to Enterprise's, weren't warp pods? Or that Meta's "antimatter residue" wasn't meant as a readily-understandable reference to the series only (save photon torps') use of antimatter, i.e., in a warp drive? I mean really. Sure, TOS shuttles have ion power...but they have warp "power" too.

As for "E didn't always have balls"--no it didn't. It (the miniatures) started without them, had them added, and appeared throughout the series sometimes without them due use of stock footage. This doesn't equal a "sometimes balls/sometimes not" (unless you argue they're deployable, which is OK with me). If they'd never had balls, Galileo wouldn't have them either.

Jeez, can we stop this pointless holding of goalposts against all shots by the other? We've made our positions clear, and both "know" the other is wrong, and either misinterpreting or ignoring points made by the other (I don't think I'm doing that, and neither do you; you're wrong in that, of course, but F it). No thoughts on Ion power?

 

[trekkist]

BTW, when I paste a URL into Imgur's "Paste image or URL"
box and I get "URL failed to upload."

As to uploading from my hard drive's saved picture file, my ignorance runs deep: top border icons do not include one to upload, and right clicking doesn't show "upload" on its drop down menu.

(feel free to say "You know too little for me to teach you" ....I won't take offense; I've been here before)

 

[Unicron]

You should be able to just copy the URL under Direct Link into the image paster here, and paste it in so it will be visible. I have noted elements of Imgur that to me seem a bit weird (I've had issues seeing other people's galleries at times and sometimes people have to modify a pasted link to make it visible for them), but generally it's been pretty reliable for posting board images. As an example:

I just normally copy the URL under Direct Link (as Imgur allows several variations for different forms of posting) and then paste it into the image function.

 

[Mytran]

BTW, when I paste a URL into Imgur's "Paste image or URL"
box and I get "URL failed to upload."

There's a lot of different URLs which Imgur offers, you may be selecting the wrong one.
Here's what I do, after I have uploaded the image from my hard drive:

1) On the page showing your library, left-click the image you want to link to. This will bring up a list of options

2) On the "Direct Link" line left-click "copy.

3) Paste the copied URL into the box to insert the image into your TrekBBS post

EDITED because I mis-read what Trekkist was saying. Blssdwlf is right, that "paste URL" feature in Imgur is buggy!

 

[trekkist]

Thanks, folks (I promise to learn the "quote" feature...soon).

As an ex-IT guy used to say when helping my ex-girlfriend, "It's not a toaster!" (of which I thought, "It should be a toaster!") (no BSG Cylon ref meant; "a simple tool")

How, oh how I miss my click-and-drag Mac!

 

[blssdwlf]

>Moving goal posts makes it harder to have a discussion. It definitely started about TOS shuttles (see below quotes.)

I don't think this qualifies as "moving goal posts." More like "broadening the argument."

Uhm, ok. The TOS shuttle's nacelles do not match the Enterprise's. Later shuttles match more. Broader.

There's also an "original intent" element. Do you really think the TOS shuttle's designers & builders did not mean its nacelles, so similar to Enterprise's, weren't warp pods? Or that Meta's "antimatter residue" wasn't meant as a readily-understandable reference to the series only (save photon torps') use of antimatter, i.e., in a warp drive? I mean really. Sure, TOS shuttles have ion power...but they have warp "power" too.

I'm putting aired episode before "original intent" (aren't you doing the same?) The TOS shuttle was called out as having "ion engine power" so I'm making due with it Why the TOS shuttle leaves a trail of antimatter? Could be many things... high energy ions interacting with the fuel (like thunderstorms making antimatter), converted energy to antimatter for FTL fuel, or some other TOS-reason that would make it dirtier than the Sigma Draconis Ion engines...

As for "E didn't always have balls"--no it didn't. It (the miniatures) started without them, had them added, and appeared throughout the series sometimes without them due use of stock footage. This doesn't equal a "sometimes balls/sometimes not" (unless you argue they're deployable, which is OK with me). If they'd never had balls, Galileo wouldn't have them either.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Jeez, can we stop this pointless holding of goalposts against all shots by the other? We've made our positions clear, and both "know" the other is wrong, and either misinterpreting or ignoring points made by the other (I don't think I'm doing that, and neither do you; you're wrong in that, of course, but F it). No thoughts on Ion power?

If we're discussing for example, a specific car is red and you disagree that's great. But you also added, "well all the other cars are blue so this car must be blue also because it fits a broader pattern" and I was redirecting back to the original car which is what we were discussing. I didn't comment on the later cars because well they are not the specific car we're talking about. Nothing personal there.

I've already mentioned my thoughts on Ion Power for the TOS Shuttle in an earlier reply.

BTW, when I paste a URL into Imgur's "Paste image or URL"
box and I get "URL failed to upload."

Many sites will not let you send an image straight to Imgur via the Paste Image or URL box. That is why I did not include it in my instructions to you. If you right-click+save the image to your hard drive first and then upload it (you can drag the image on your hard drive to the Imgur "drop images here" box) it will upload. Once you can see the image on imgur you can then right-click on the image and select "copy image link" or "copy image address" and use that link to past into the TrekBBS image option.

 

[trekkist]

BTW, when I paste a URL into Imgur's "Paste image or URL"
box and I get "URL failed to upload."
Many sites will not let you send an image straight to Imgur via the Paste Image or URL box. That is why I did not include it in my instructions to you. If you right-click+save the image to your hard drive first and then upload it (you can drag the image on your hard drive to the Imgur "drop images here" box) it will upload. Once you can see the image on imgur you can then right-click on the image and select "copy image link" or "copy image address" and use that link to past into the TrekBBS image option.

 

[JesseM]

>Seriously, you're okay with FTL drives, artificial gravity and transporters and you're getting hung up on ships traveling at light speed?

Yup. Many a theory exists (and have for decades) for the possibility of FTL. Gravity's nature is as yet almost entirely mysterious--who knows what we might find possible in the future? (and anyway, they use "lenses" to "focus" it--mere engineering). Transporters fun up against the uncertainty principle only in their dematerialization and re-materialization phases (admittedly being at that point a technology indistinguishable from magic), but (as is apparent on close observation of Deep Canon © ® ) "move" matter through a space warp (another "thing" for which many a possible theoretical justification exists).

Lightspeed's a miracle of different color, though--different not in degree but kind. ALL relativistic effects have been proven six ways from Sunday; put the hammer down on an infinite-acceleration drive, your mass will rise on an asymptote toward infinity, and shipboard time slow along the opposite curve. I've never heard of even a nutcase theory that might "undo" relativistic effects.

I think traveling at light speed would only be a miracle for a massive object if it was just a normal velocity through space, as opposed to some sort of effect of warped space. In the real theory of general relativity the light speed limit for massive objects only applies to the object's speed measured in "locally", i.e. in the sense of what would be measured in a very small area of spacetime around them where the curvature is negligible (like how if you zoomed in on a curved 2D surface, like the surface of a sphere, a small enough patch would be very close to flat). And in relativity there's theoretical possibility of an "Alcubierre drive" which would be a bubble of warped spacetime that carries things at potentially faster than light speeds in a "global" sense, but it doesn't violate relativity because the local speed of a massive object inside the bubble is slower than light. And I've read it's also possible to have travel by slower-than-light Alcubierre bubbles where the usual speed-based formulas of special relativity don't apply. You'd have to ask a physicist to say for sure but I doubt there's any fundamental problem with an Alcubierre bubble that moves at exactly the speed of light in a global sense (so for example an external observer would see it take exactly 1 year to travel a distance of 1 light-year),

The TNG tech manual also has a description of Zefram Cochrane's first successful experiments with warp travel which for all intents and purposes involved travel at the speed of light (the historical info was rendered obsolete by the depiction of Cochrane's first warp flight in First Contact, but it could still suggest something about how Okuda and Sternbach imagined warp travel to work, specifically that the normal energy formula of relativity doesn't apply to warp travel):

As early as 2061, Cochrane's team succeeded in producing a prototype field device of massive proportions. Described as a fluctuation superimpeller, it finally allowed an unmanned flight test vehicle to straddle the speed of light (c) "wall," alternating between two velocity states while remaining at neither for longer than the Planck time, 1.3 x 10^-43 second, the smallest possible unit of measurable time. This had the net effect of maintaining velocities at the previously unattainable speed of light, while avoiding the theoretically infinite energy expenditure which would otherwise have been required.

 

[C.E. Evans]

The TNG tech manual also has a description of Zefram Cochrane's first successful experiments with warp travel which for all intents and purposes involved travel at the speed of light (the historical info was rendered obsolete by the depiction of Cochrane's first warp flight in First Contact, but it could still suggest something about how Okuda and Sternbach imagined warp travel to work, specifically that the normal energy formula of relativity doesn't apply to warp travel):

It suggested that Cochrane's original engine was primitive, but he and his team continued to refine warp drive for many years afterward, eventually developing an engine more common to those seen in later Trek eras.

 

[Forbin]

What happened to Trekkist?

 

[David cgc]

What happened to Trekkist?

He was being generally abrasive and condescending throughout the board, but I think the major issue was a "political" topic he posted in Misc that was so inflammatory and potentially legally actionable the mods erased it nearly immediately. That probably cost him a good chunk of benefit-of-the-doubt.

 

[Mytran]

Fell into a black hole?

You mean into "what they used to call" a black hole, right?

 

[shapeshifter]

hehe No, remember, they used to call them black stars.

 

[aridas sofia]

In TOS the impulse and warp engines do appear to have some Newtonian behavior though. Thrusters (or rockets) are used for accelerating and decelerating and we do get all the fun shots of the Enterprise flying in space not pointing in her flight vector. I agree that impulse/warp engines are doing some space/time warping but IMHO they magnify the effects of thrusters all while not disturbing the immediate environment (reference BOP in "The Voyage Home" under impulse and warp in Earth's atmosphere.)

There was an attempt to resolve this (that went largely ignored) in the TMP blueprints of Enterprise drawn by David Kimble. He identifies the “vents” on the upper side of the secondary hull as “maneuvering thrusters”. I think fans confuse this with the RCS thrusters he identifies at various locations around the ship. My understanding from communication with him back then is that is not the case. THEY were the Newtonian thrusters described in TMoST, and the impulse drive was a non-Newtonian drive that allowed the ship to fly at relativistic speeds without experiencing time dilation.

Where these “maneuvering thrusters” are on the TOS ship is up for debate. I made the small, circular ports on the impulse drive the Newtonian maneuvering thrusters.

 

[blssdwlf]

There was an attempt to resolve this (that went largely ignored) in the TMP blueprints of Enterprise drawn by David Kimble. He identifies the “vents” on the upper side of the secondary hull as “maneuvering thrusters”. I think fans confuse this with the RCS thrusters he identifies at various locations around the ship. My understanding from communication with him back then is that is not the case. THEY were the Newtonian thrusters described in TMoST, and the impulse drive was a non-Newtonian drive that allowed the ship to fly at relativistic speeds without experiencing time dilation.

Where these “maneuvering thrusters” are on the TOS ship is up for debate. I made the small, circular ports on the impulse drive the Newtonian maneuvering thrusters.

Yeah, I remember seeing those 4 vents on the upper side of the TMP secondary hull labeled as some kind of thrusters. On the TOS Enterprise the thrusters could be hidden behind plates like the phasers and torpedo launchers. Or perhaps the nacelle's intake rings in the front and the 3 lights on the front of the saucer are thrust reverse exhausts...

Thinking about it some more, maybe the term "Newtonian" isn't quite exact to describe TOS impulse/warp. In TOS, warp (and I'm assuming impulse) there is some hybrid mechanic going on that I think leans to having impulse/warp inertia and needing to use thrusters to accelerate/decelerate or change course. All IMHO.